You didn't even watch the video. He does, however, use something you are unfamiliar with, and that is, he uses facts.
"Mummy my tummy hurts" - How guns keep you safe.
- Thread starter Tommy Tainant
- Start date
You didn't even watch the video. He does, however, use something you are unfamiliar with, and that is, he uses facts.
Harry Dresden
Only Adamantium Member
you sound like you been there.....
DrLove
Diamond Member
was it something i said Dr?......lol....oh oh....i guess i was right.....lol.....why dont you just say that you cant disprove that 1.1 million......to him he did back them up.....its up to you to disprove his "facts".....your the one who said that to him not me...apparently you dont have better source either do you?...so does he have to use your anti gun sites?...
Link us to your 1.1 mil claim please - Studies by your beloved (and corrupt) NRA or other barrel stoker sites unacceptable
Nope, just a source to prove he didn’t pull 1.1 million butt nuggets out of his prodigious ass.
You got one?
No one can disprove an ass nugget Harry my boy.
Up to him to back up those with FACTS.
1.1m?
Sorry. Unicorns are real - prove me wrong!
Did you prove unicorns aren’t real? If not, beat it
Nope, it’s your breath
Harry Dresden
Only Adamantium Member
or it could be that upper lip of yours....was it something i said Dr?......lol....oh oh....i guess i was right.....lol.....why dont you just say that you cant disprove that 1.1 million......to him he did back them up.....its up to you to disprove his "facts".....your the one who said that to him not me...apparently you dont have better source either do you?...so does he have to use your anti gun sites?...
Link us to your 1.1 mil claim please - Studies by your beloved (and corrupt) NRA or other barrel stoker sites unacceptable
Nope, just a source to prove he didn’t pull 1.1 million butt nuggets out of his prodigious ass.
You got one?
No one can disprove an ass nugget Harry my boy.
Up to him to back up those with FACTS.
1.1m?
Sorry. Unicorns are real - prove me wrong!
Did you prove unicorns aren’t real? If not, beat it
Nope, it’s your breath
2aguy
Diamond Member
- Jul 19, 2014
- 113,045
- 53,542
- 2,290
so does he have to use your anti gun sites?...
Link us to your 1.1 mil claim please - Studies by your beloved (and corrupt) NRA or other barrel stoker sites unacceptable
Nope, just a source to prove he didn’t pull 1.1 million butt nuggets out of his prodigious ass.
You got one?
Hey....shithead...
Here.....bill clinton had his Dept. of Justice repeat Kleck's research to prove him wrong...they didn't...this is what they actually found...
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/165476.pdf
Applying those restrictions leaves 19 NSPOF respondents (0.8 percent of the sample), representing 1.5 million defensive users.
This estimate is directly comparable to the well-known estimate of Kleck and Gertz, shown in the last column of exhibit 7. While the NSPOF estimate is smaller, it is statistically plausible that the difference is due to sampling error. Inclusion of multiple DGUs reported by half of the 19 NSPOF respondents increases the estimate to 4.7 million DGUs.
Obama told his CDC to look at all gun research...this is what they found in 2013.....
you idiot..
Front Matter | Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence | The National Academies Press
Defensive Use of Guns
Defensive use of guns by crime victims is a common occurrence, although the exact number remains disputed (Cook and Ludwig, 1996; Kleck, 2001a). Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million (Kleck, 2001a),
-------
A different issue is whether defensive uses of guns, however numerous or rare they may be, are effective in preventing injury to the gun-wielding crime victim. Studies that directly assessed the effect of actual defensive uses of guns (i.e., incidents in which a gun was “used” by the crime victim in the sense of attacking or threatening an offender) have found consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self-protective strategies (Kleck, 1988; Kleck and DeLone, 1993; Southwick, 2000; Tark and Kleck, 2004). Effectiveness of defensive tactics, however, is likely to vary across types of victims, types of offenders, and circumstances of the crime, so further research is needed both to explore these contingencies and to confirm or discount earlier findings.
The Centers For Disease Control...the research they hid...
SSRN Electronic Library
The timing of CDC’s addition of a DGU question to the BRFSS is of some interest. Prior to 1996, the BRFSS had never included a question about DGU. Kleck and Gertz (1995) conducted their survey in February through April 1993, presented their estimate that there were over 2 million DGUs in 1992 at the annual meetings of the American Society of Criminology in November 1994, and published it in the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology in the Fall of 1995. CDC added a DGU question to the BRFSS the very first year they could do so after that 1995 publication, in the 1996 edition. CDC was not the only federal agency during the Clinton administration to field a survey addressing the prevalence of DGU at that particular time. The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) financed a national survey devoting even more detailed attention to estimating DGU prevalence, which was fielded in November and December 1994, just months after preliminary results of the 1993 Kleck/Gertz survey became known. Neither CDC nor NIJ had ever financed research into DGU before 1996. Perhaps there was just “something in the air” that motivated the two agencies to suddenly decide in 1994 to address the topic. Another interpretation, however, is that fielding of the surveys was triggered by the Kleck/Gertz findings that DGU was common, and that these agencies hoped to obtain lower DGU prevalence estimates than those obtained by Kleck/Gertz. Low estimates would have implied fewer beneficial uses of firearms, results that would have been far more congenial to the strongly pro-control positions of the Clinton administration.
CDC, in Surveys It Never Bothered Making Public, Provides More Evidence That Plenty of Americans Innocently Defend Themselves with Guns
Kleck's new paper—"What Do CDC's Surveys Say About the Frequency of Defensive Gun Uses?"—finds that the agency had asked about DGUs in its Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System in 1996, 1997, and 1998.
Those polls, Kleck writes,
Kleck was impressed with how well the survey worded its question: "During the last 12 months, have you confronted another person with a firearm, even if you did not fire it, to protect yourself, your property, or someone else?" Respondents were told to leave out incidents from occupations, like policing, where using firearms is part of the job. Kleck is impressed with how the question excludes animals but includes DGUs outside the home as well as within it.
Kleck is less impressed with the fact that the question was only asked of people who admitted to owning guns in their home earlier in the survey, and that they asked no follow-up questions regarding the specific nature of the DGU incident.
From Kleck's own surveys, he found that only 79 percent of those who reported a DGU "had also reported a gun in their household at the time of the interview," so he thinks whatever numbers the CDC found need to be revised upward to account for that. (Kleck speculates that CDC showed a sudden interest in the question of DGUs starting in 1996 because Kleck's own famous/notorious survey had been published in 1995.)
At any rate, Kleck downloaded the datasets for those three years and found that the "weighted percent who reported a DGU...was 1.3% in 1996, 0.9% in 1997, 1.0% in 1998, and 1.07% in all three surveys combined."
Kleck figures if you do the adjustment upward he thinks necessary for those who had DGU incidents without personally owning a gun in the home at the time of the survey, and then the adjustment downward he thinks necessary because CDC didn't do detailed follow-ups to confirm the nature of the incident, you get 1.24 percent, a close match to his own 1.326 percent figure.
He concludes that the small difference between his estimate and the CDC's "can be attributed to declining rates of violent crime, which accounts for most DGUs. With fewer occasions for self-defense in the form of violent victimizations, one would expect fewer DGUs."
Kleck further details how much these CDC surveys confirmed his own controversial work:
- Banned
- #146
Why?
Link us to your 1.1 mil claim please - Studies by your beloved (and corrupt) NRA or other barrel stoker sites unacceptable
Shit head...none of the studies were by the NRA and in fact, when Dr. Lott did his research he was anti-gun, you dumb ****...
A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....
The name of the group doing the study, the year of the study, the number of defensive gun uses and if police and military defensive gun uses are included.....notice the bill clinton and obama defensive gun use research is highlighted.....
GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense
GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys
Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, no military)
DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, no military)
L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, no military)
Kleck......1994...2.5 million ( no cops, no military)
CDC...1996-1998... 1.1 million averaged over those years.( no cops, no military)
Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million
--------------------
Bordua...1977...1,414,544
DMIb...1978...1,098,409 ( no cops, no military)
Hart...1981...1.797,461 ( no cops, no military)
Mauser...1990...1,487,342 ( no cops,no military)
Gallup...1993...1,621,377 ( no cops, no military)
DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million ( the bill clinton study)
Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."
(Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology,[17] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.[18])
Paper: "Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment." By David McDowall and others. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, March 2000. Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment - Springer
-------------------------------------------
Ohio...1982...771,043
Gallup...1991...777,152
Tarrance... 1994... 764,036 (no cops, no military)
Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..
Ok I give you this round. However, what is the definition of “self-defense”?
If you’re gonna try and convince me that one out of 200 US adults use a firearm in self-defense, then I’m callin BS
2aguy
Diamond Member
- Jul 19, 2014
- 113,045
- 53,542
- 2,290
your the one who said that to him not me...apparently you dont have better source either do you?...so does he have to use your anti gun sites?...
Link us to your 1.1 mil claim please - Studies by your beloved (and corrupt) NRA or other barrel stoker sites unacceptable
Nope, just a source to prove he didn’t pull 1.1 million butt nuggets out of his prodigious ass.
You got one?
No one can disprove an ass nugget Harry my boy.
Up to him to back up those with FACTS.
1.1m?
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/165476.pdf
Applying those restrictions leaves 19 NSPOF respondents (0.8 percent of the sample), representing 1.5 million defensive users.
This estimate is directly comparable to the well-known estimate of Kleck and Gertz, shown in the last column of exhibit 7. While the NSPOF estimate is smaller, it is statistically plausible that the difference is due to sampling error. Inclusion of multiple DGUs reported by half of the 19 NSPOF respondents increases the estimate to 4.7 million DGUs.
Obama told his CDC to look at all gun research...this is what they found in 2013.....
you idiot..
Front Matter | Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence | The National Academies Press
Defensive Use of Guns
Defensive use of guns by crime victims is a common occurrence, although the exact number remains disputed (Cook and Ludwig, 1996; Kleck, 2001a). Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million (Kleck, 2001a),
-------
A different issue is whether defensive uses of guns, however numerous or rare they may be, are effective in preventing injury to the gun-wielding crime victim. Studies that directly assessed the effect of actual defensive uses of guns (i.e., incidents in which a gun was “used” by the crime victim in the sense of attacking or threatening an offender) have found consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self-protective strategies (Kleck, 1988; Kleck and DeLone, 1993; Southwick, 2000; Tark and Kleck, 2004). Effectiveness of defensive tactics, however, is likely to vary across types of victims, types of offenders, and circumstances of the crime, so further research is needed both to explore these contingencies and to confirm or discount earlier findings.
The Centers For Disease Control...the research they hid...
SSRN Electronic Library
The timing of CDC’s addition of a DGU question to the BRFSS is of some interest. Prior to 1996, the BRFSS had never included a question about DGU. Kleck and Gertz (1995) conducted their survey in February through April 1993, presented their estimate that there were over 2 million DGUs in 1992 at the annual meetings of the American Society of Criminology in November 1994, and published it in the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology in the Fall of 1995. CDC added a DGU question to the BRFSS the very first year they could do so after that 1995 publication, in the 1996 edition. CDC was not the only federal agency during the Clinton administration to field a survey addressing the prevalence of DGU at that particular time. The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) financed a national survey devoting even more detailed attention to estimating DGU prevalence, which was fielded in November and December 1994, just months after preliminary results of the 1993 Kleck/Gertz survey became known. Neither CDC nor NIJ had ever financed research into DGU before 1996. Perhaps there was just “something in the air” that motivated the two agencies to suddenly decide in 1994 to address the topic. Another interpretation, however, is that fielding of the surveys was triggered by the Kleck/Gertz findings that DGU was common, and that these agencies hoped to obtain lower DGU prevalence estimates than those obtained by Kleck/Gertz. Low estimates would have implied fewer beneficial uses of firearms, results that would have been far more congenial to the strongly pro-control positions of the Clinton administration.
CDC, in Surveys It Never Bothered Making Public, Provides More Evidence That Plenty of Americans Innocently Defend Themselves with Guns
Kleck's new paper—"What Do CDC's Surveys Say About the Frequency of Defensive Gun Uses?"—finds that the agency had asked about DGUs in its Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System in 1996, 1997, and 1998.
Those polls, Kleck writes,
Kleck was impressed with how well the survey worded its question: "During the last 12 months, have you confronted another person with a firearm, even if you did not fire it, to protect yourself, your property, or someone else?" Respondents were told to leave out incidents from occupations, like policing, where using firearms is part of the job. Kleck is impressed with how the question excludes animals but includes DGUs outside the home as well as within it.
Kleck is less impressed with the fact that the question was only asked of people who admitted to owning guns in their home earlier in the survey, and that they asked no follow-up questions regarding the specific nature of the DGU incident.
From Kleck's own surveys, he found that only 79 percent of those who reported a DGU "had also reported a gun in their household at the time of the interview," so he thinks whatever numbers the CDC found need to be revised upward to account for that. (Kleck speculates that CDC showed a sudden interest in the question of DGUs starting in 1996 because Kleck's own famous/notorious survey had been published in 1995.)
At any rate, Kleck downloaded the datasets for those three years and found that the "weighted percent who reported a DGU...was 1.3% in 1996, 0.9% in 1997, 1.0% in 1998, and 1.07% in all three surveys combined."
Kleck figures if you do the adjustment upward he thinks necessary for those who had DGU incidents without personally owning a gun in the home at the time of the survey, and then the adjustment downward he thinks necessary because CDC didn't do detailed follow-ups to confirm the nature of the incident, you get 1.24 percent, a close match to his own 1.326 percent figure.
He concludes that the small difference between his estimate and the CDC's "can be attributed to declining rates of violent crime, which accounts for most DGUs. With fewer occasions for self-defense in the form of violent victimizations, one would expect fewer DGUs."
Kleck further details how much these CDC surveys confirmed his own controversial work:
Also...the rest...
A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....
The name of the group doing the study, the year of the study, the number of defensive gun uses and if police and military defensive gun uses are included.....notice the bill clinton and obama defensive gun use research is highlighted.....
GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense
GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys
Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, no military)
DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, no military)
L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, no military)
Kleck......1994...2.5 million ( no cops, no military)
CDC...1996-1998... 1.1 million averaged over those years.( no cops, no military)
Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million
--------------------
Bordua...1977...1,414,544
DMIb...1978...1,098,409 ( no cops, no military)
Hart...1981...1.797,461 ( no cops, no military)
Mauser...1990...1,487,342 ( no cops,no military)
Gallup...1993...1,621,377 ( no cops, no military)
DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million ( the bill clinton study)
Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."
(Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology,[17] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.[18])
Paper: "Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment." By David McDowall and others. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, March 2000. Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment - Springer
-------------------------------------------
Ohio...1982...771,043
Gallup...1991...777,152
Tarrance... 1994... 764,036 (no cops, no military)
Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..
- Banned
- #148
Not really though.
2aguy
Diamond Member
- Jul 19, 2014
- 113,045
- 53,542
- 2,290
Most developed countries have a better life quality than most Americans, more educated, healthier, higher life expectancy rates....less crimes and homicides. How did owning a gun make you better than them again ?We are not subject, like you.
Boy, 6, shot and killed after mum gave another driver the finger on school-run
Aiden Leos was sitting in the back of his family car when he was shot and killed as a result of what is believed to be a road rage attackwww.mirror.co.uk
Its almost impossible to process this incident. What is wrong with you people ?
Well...you mean after World War 1 and World War 2...when we went over to Europe with guns to save them.......or after the Europeans gave up their guns, then the German socialists murdered 12 million unarmed men, women and children?
And now, as the United States protects Europe with our blood and money...our military keeps Russia from taking over the continent, and keeps German from invading it's neighbors.....so that Europeans can live in their welfare states as we protect them, and provide their advanced medical technology and all of their real technological innovation....
Do you mean that......?
If the Europeans actually had to pay their own way.....have their young men and women serve in their militaries, pay for their militaries.....and actually work for a living....maybe they wouldn't have time to feel superior to the U.S....
Meanwhile, our citizens use our legal guns to save lives every single year....1.1 million times a year our citizens use their legal guns to stop rape, robberies and murders...
And, shithead.......Europe is not the Europe it used to be....3rd world immigrant drug gangs are using fully automatic miltary rifles and grenades to enforce their drug trade....
So violence is coming to Europe.....
Tommy Tainant
Diamond Member
- Thread starter
- #150
Vagabond63 has debunked his figures many time on here Harry. he will be along at some point to do it again.to him he did back them up.....its up to you to disprove his "facts".....your the one who said that to him not me...apparently you dont have better source either do you?...so does he have to use your anti gun sites?...
Link us to your 1.1 mil claim please - Studies by your beloved (and corrupt) NRA or other barrel stoker sites unacceptable
Nope, just a source to prove he didn’t pull 1.1 million butt nuggets out of his prodigious ass.
You got one?
No one can disprove an ass nugget Harry my boy.
Up to him to back up those with FACTS.
1.1m?
Tommy Tainant
Diamond Member
- Thread starter
- #151
You know its over when you go nazi.Most developed countries have a better life quality than most Americans, more educated, healthier, higher life expectancy rates....less crimes and homicides. How did owning a gun make you better than them again ?We are not subject, like you.Boy, 6, shot and killed after mum gave another driver the finger on school-run
Aiden Leos was sitting in the back of his family car when he was shot and killed as a result of what is believed to be a road rage attack
Its almost impossible to process this incident. What is wrong with you people ?
Well...you mean after World War 1 and World War 2...when we went over to Europe with guns to save them.......or after the Europeans gave up their guns, then the German socialists murdered 12 million unarmed men, women and children?
And now, as the United States protects Europe with our blood and money...our military keeps Russia from taking over the continent, and keeps German from invading it's neighbors.....so that Europeans can live in their welfare states as we protect them, and provide their advanced medical technology and all of their real technological innovation....
Do you mean that......?
If the Europeans actually had to pay their own way.....have their young men and women serve in their militaries, pay for their militaries.....and actually work for a living....maybe they wouldn't have time to feel superior to the U.S....
Meanwhile, our citizens use our legal guns to save lives every single year....1.1 million times a year our citizens use their legal guns to stop rape, robberies and murders...
And, shithead.......Europe is not the Europe it used to be....3rd world immigrant drug gangs are using fully automatic miltary rifles and grenades to enforce their drug trade....
So violence is coming to Europe.....
2aguy
Diamond Member
- Jul 19, 2014
- 113,045
- 53,542
- 2,290
You are a moron....taking his information from an unfunny british comedian....
Who benefits from the law? Actually, since poor blacks who live in high-crime urban areas are the most likely victims of crime, they are also the ones who benefit the most from stand your ground laws. The laws make it easier for would-be victims to protect themselves when the police can't arrive fast enough. Therefore, rules that make self-defense more difficult disproportionately impact blacks.
Blacks make up 16.6 percent of Florida's population but account for 31 percent of the defendants invoking the stand your ground defense.
Black defendants who invoke this statute are actually acquitted 8 percentage points more frequently than whites who use this very same defense.
Those who conclude the law is racially biased point to data compiled by the Tampa Bay Tribune, which collected 112 cases where people charged with murder relied on Florida's stand your ground law, from the first cases in 2006 to July 24 of this year. The Tribune's "shocking" claim: 72 percent of those who killed a black person faced no penalty compared to 59 percent of those who killed a white.
But this doesn't tell the whole story as blacks are overwhelmingly killed by other blacks.
Thus, it is also true that blacks claiming self-defense under the stand your ground law are convicted at a lower rate than are whites.
About 69 percent of blacks raising the stand your Ground defense were not convicted compared to 62 percent of whites.
If blacks are supposedly being discriminated against because their killers so often are not facing any penalty, it must also follow that they are being discriminated in favor of when blacks who invoke a stand your ground defense are convicted at a lower rate than are whites. Those who interpret the data as evidence of racism are cherry-picking numbers.
https://www.chicagotribune.com/opinion/ct-xpm-2013-10-28-ct-oped-1029-guns-20131029-story.html
And this...
Statement of Commissioner Gail Heriot by Gail L. Heriot :: SSRN
The report is unusual in the sense that (apart from individual Commissioner Statements) it consists solely of a five year-old briefing transcript. It contains no original analysis, findings or recommendations.
It was not supposed to be that way. When the Commission undertook this project, the plan was for the Commission to conduct empirical research on “Stand Your Ground” laws and to produce a report containing both that research and a discussion of “Stand Your Ground” laws based in part on the testimony produced at the briefing but also on the Commission staff’s independent research.
Alas, when the empirical research did not support the preconceived view of the Commission’s majority that “Stand Your Ground” laws harm African Americans, the project was shelved.
Years later—at a time the Commission was interested in getting out as many reports as possible—it decided to publish a transcript of the briefing along with Commissioner Statements. After almost two further years of delay, the report was finally published.
DrLove
Diamond Member
your the one who said that to him not me...apparently you dont have better source either do you?...so does he have to use your anti gun sites?...
Link us to your 1.1 mil claim please - Studies by your beloved (and corrupt) NRA or other barrel stoker sites unacceptable
Nope, just a source to prove he didn’t pull 1.1 million butt nuggets out of his prodigious ass.
You got one?
No one can disprove an ass nugget Harry my boy.
Up to him to back up those with FACTS.
1.1m?
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/165476.pdf
Applying those restrictions leaves 19 NSPOF respondents (0.8 percent of the sample), representing 1.5 million defensive users.
This estimate is directly comparable to the well-known estimate of Kleck and Gertz, shown in the last column of exhibit 7. While the NSPOF estimate is smaller, it is statistically plausible that the difference is due to sampling error. Inclusion of multiple DGUs reported by half of the 19 NSPOF respondents increases the estimate to 4.7 million DGUs.
Obama told his CDC to look at all gun research...this is what they found in 2013.....
you idiot..
Front Matter | Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence | The National Academies Press
Defensive Use of Guns
Defensive use of guns by crime victims is a common occurrence, although the exact number remains disputed (Cook and Ludwig, 1996; Kleck, 2001a). Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million (Kleck, 2001a),
-------
A different issue is whether defensive uses of guns, however numerous or rare they may be, are effective in preventing injury to the gun-wielding crime victim. Studies that directly assessed the effect of actual defensive uses of guns (i.e., incidents in which a gun was “used” by the crime victim in the sense of attacking or threatening an offender) have found consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self-protective strategies (Kleck, 1988; Kleck and DeLone, 1993; Southwick, 2000; Tark and Kleck, 2004). Effectiveness of defensive tactics, however, is likely to vary across types of victims, types of offenders, and circumstances of the crime, so further research is needed both to explore these contingencies and to confirm or discount earlier findings.
The Centers For Disease Control...the research they hid...
SSRN Electronic Library
The timing of CDC’s addition of a DGU question to the BRFSS is of some interest. Prior to 1996, the BRFSS had never included a question about DGU. Kleck and Gertz (1995) conducted their survey in February through April 1993, presented their estimate that there were over 2 million DGUs in 1992 at the annual meetings of the American Society of Criminology in November 1994, and published it in the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology in the Fall of 1995. CDC added a DGU question to the BRFSS the very first year they could do so after that 1995 publication, in the 1996 edition. CDC was not the only federal agency during the Clinton administration to field a survey addressing the prevalence of DGU at that particular time. The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) financed a national survey devoting even more detailed attention to estimating DGU prevalence, which was fielded in November and December 1994, just months after preliminary results of the 1993 Kleck/Gertz survey became known. Neither CDC nor NIJ had ever financed research into DGU before 1996. Perhaps there was just “something in the air” that motivated the two agencies to suddenly decide in 1994 to address the topic. Another interpretation, however, is that fielding of the surveys was triggered by the Kleck/Gertz findings that DGU was common, and that these agencies hoped to obtain lower DGU prevalence estimates than those obtained by Kleck/Gertz. Low estimates would have implied fewer beneficial uses of firearms, results that would have been far more congenial to the strongly pro-control positions of the Clinton administration.
CDC, in Surveys It Never Bothered Making Public, Provides More Evidence That Plenty of Americans Innocently Defend Themselves with Guns
Kleck's new paper—"What Do CDC's Surveys Say About the Frequency of Defensive Gun Uses?"—finds that the agency had asked about DGUs in its Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System in 1996, 1997, and 1998.
Those polls, Kleck writes,
Kleck was impressed with how well the survey worded its question: "During the last 12 months, have you confronted another person with a firearm, even if you did not fire it, to protect yourself, your property, or someone else?" Respondents were told to leave out incidents from occupations, like policing, where using firearms is part of the job. Kleck is impressed with how the question excludes animals but includes DGUs outside the home as well as within it.
Kleck is less impressed with the fact that the question was only asked of people who admitted to owning guns in their home earlier in the survey, and that they asked no follow-up questions regarding the specific nature of the DGU incident.
From Kleck's own surveys, he found that only 79 percent of those who reported a DGU "had also reported a gun in their household at the time of the interview," so he thinks whatever numbers the CDC found need to be revised upward to account for that. (Kleck speculates that CDC showed a sudden interest in the question of DGUs starting in 1996 because Kleck's own famous/notorious survey had been published in 1995.)
At any rate, Kleck downloaded the datasets for those three years and found that the "weighted percent who reported a DGU...was 1.3% in 1996, 0.9% in 1997, 1.0% in 1998, and 1.07% in all three surveys combined."
Kleck figures if you do the adjustment upward he thinks necessary for those who had DGU incidents without personally owning a gun in the home at the time of the survey, and then the adjustment downward he thinks necessary because CDC didn't do detailed follow-ups to confirm the nature of the incident, you get 1.24 percent, a close match to his own 1.326 percent figure.
He concludes that the small difference between his estimate and the CDC's "can be attributed to declining rates of violent crime, which accounts for most DGUs. With fewer occasions for self-defense in the form of violent victimizations, one would expect fewer DGUs."
Kleck further details how much these CDC surveys confirmed his own controversial work:
Also...the rest...
A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....
The name of the group doing the study, the year of the study, the number of defensive gun uses and if police and military defensive gun uses are included.....notice the bill clinton and obama defensive gun use research is highlighted.....
GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense
GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys
Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, no military)
DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, no military)
L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, no military)
Kleck......1994...2.5 million ( no cops, no military)
CDC...1996-1998... 1.1 million averaged over those years.( no cops, no military)
Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million
--------------------
Bordua...1977...1,414,544
DMIb...1978...1,098,409 ( no cops, no military)
Hart...1981...1.797,461 ( no cops, no military)
Mauser...1990...1,487,342 ( no cops,no military)
Gallup...1993...1,621,377 ( no cops, no military)
DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million ( the bill clinton study)
Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."
(Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology,[17] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.[18])
Paper: "Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment." By David McDowall and others. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, March 2000. Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment - Springer
-------------------------------------------
Ohio...1982...771,043
Gallup...1991...777,152
Tarrance... 1994... 764,036 (no cops, no military)
Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..
You ******* idiot
Loving states surveyed but still waiting on a precise definition. IOW - If I live on a hog farm in Montana, hear a bump in the middle of the night, grab ma shotgun n say “hey you pig thief - ya’d best run!!!” Does that count as one?The following 15 states were surveyed: Alaska, Colorado, Hawaii, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, Montana, Ohio
2aguy
Diamond Member
- Jul 19, 2014
- 113,045
- 53,542
- 2,290
Vagabond63 has debunked his figures many time on here Harry. he will be along at some point to do it again.to him he did back them up.....its up to you to disprove his "facts".....your the one who said that to him not me...apparently you dont have better source either do you?...so does he have to use your anti gun sites?...
Link us to your 1.1 mil claim please - Studies by your beloved (and corrupt) NRA or other barrel stoker sites unacceptable
Nope, just a source to prove he didn’t pull 1.1 million butt nuggets out of his prodigious ass.
You got one?
No one can disprove an ass nugget Harry my boy.
Up to him to back up those with FACTS.
1.1m?
No, he hasn't....he says ..."I debunk thy numbers...." and then goes away.......I have shown the research from the Centers for Disease Control, and the Department of Justice, two anti-gun government agencies....
2aguy
Diamond Member
- Jul 19, 2014
- 113,045
- 53,542
- 2,290
your the one who said that to him not me...apparently you dont have better source either do you?...so does he have to use your anti gun sites?...
Link us to your 1.1 mil claim please - Studies by your beloved (and corrupt) NRA or other barrel stoker sites unacceptable
Nope, just a source to prove he didn’t pull 1.1 million butt nuggets out of his prodigious ass.
You got one?
No one can disprove an ass nugget Harry my boy.
Up to him to back up those with FACTS.
1.1m?
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/165476.pdf
Applying those restrictions leaves 19 NSPOF respondents (0.8 percent of the sample), representing 1.5 million defensive users.
This estimate is directly comparable to the well-known estimate of Kleck and Gertz, shown in the last column of exhibit 7. While the NSPOF estimate is smaller, it is statistically plausible that the difference is due to sampling error. Inclusion of multiple DGUs reported by half of the 19 NSPOF respondents increases the estimate to 4.7 million DGUs.
Obama told his CDC to look at all gun research...this is what they found in 2013.....
you idiot..
Front Matter | Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence | The National Academies Press
Defensive Use of Guns
Defensive use of guns by crime victims is a common occurrence, although the exact number remains disputed (Cook and Ludwig, 1996; Kleck, 2001a). Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million (Kleck, 2001a),
-------
A different issue is whether defensive uses of guns, however numerous or rare they may be, are effective in preventing injury to the gun-wielding crime victim. Studies that directly assessed the effect of actual defensive uses of guns (i.e., incidents in which a gun was “used” by the crime victim in the sense of attacking or threatening an offender) have found consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self-protective strategies (Kleck, 1988; Kleck and DeLone, 1993; Southwick, 2000; Tark and Kleck, 2004). Effectiveness of defensive tactics, however, is likely to vary across types of victims, types of offenders, and circumstances of the crime, so further research is needed both to explore these contingencies and to confirm or discount earlier findings.
The Centers For Disease Control...the research they hid...
SSRN Electronic Library
The timing of CDC’s addition of a DGU question to the BRFSS is of some interest. Prior to 1996, the BRFSS had never included a question about DGU. Kleck and Gertz (1995) conducted their survey in February through April 1993, presented their estimate that there were over 2 million DGUs in 1992 at the annual meetings of the American Society of Criminology in November 1994, and published it in the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology in the Fall of 1995. CDC added a DGU question to the BRFSS the very first year they could do so after that 1995 publication, in the 1996 edition. CDC was not the only federal agency during the Clinton administration to field a survey addressing the prevalence of DGU at that particular time. The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) financed a national survey devoting even more detailed attention to estimating DGU prevalence, which was fielded in November and December 1994, just months after preliminary results of the 1993 Kleck/Gertz survey became known. Neither CDC nor NIJ had ever financed research into DGU before 1996. Perhaps there was just “something in the air” that motivated the two agencies to suddenly decide in 1994 to address the topic. Another interpretation, however, is that fielding of the surveys was triggered by the Kleck/Gertz findings that DGU was common, and that these agencies hoped to obtain lower DGU prevalence estimates than those obtained by Kleck/Gertz. Low estimates would have implied fewer beneficial uses of firearms, results that would have been far more congenial to the strongly pro-control positions of the Clinton administration.
CDC, in Surveys It Never Bothered Making Public, Provides More Evidence That Plenty of Americans Innocently Defend Themselves with Guns
Kleck's new paper—"What Do CDC's Surveys Say About the Frequency of Defensive Gun Uses?"—finds that the agency had asked about DGUs in its Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System in 1996, 1997, and 1998.
Those polls, Kleck writes,
Kleck was impressed with how well the survey worded its question: "During the last 12 months, have you confronted another person with a firearm, even if you did not fire it, to protect yourself, your property, or someone else?" Respondents were told to leave out incidents from occupations, like policing, where using firearms is part of the job. Kleck is impressed with how the question excludes animals but includes DGUs outside the home as well as within it.
Kleck is less impressed with the fact that the question was only asked of people who admitted to owning guns in their home earlier in the survey, and that they asked no follow-up questions regarding the specific nature of the DGU incident.
From Kleck's own surveys, he found that only 79 percent of those who reported a DGU "had also reported a gun in their household at the time of the interview," so he thinks whatever numbers the CDC found need to be revised upward to account for that. (Kleck speculates that CDC showed a sudden interest in the question of DGUs starting in 1996 because Kleck's own famous/notorious survey had been published in 1995.)
At any rate, Kleck downloaded the datasets for those three years and found that the "weighted percent who reported a DGU...was 1.3% in 1996, 0.9% in 1997, 1.0% in 1998, and 1.07% in all three surveys combined."
Kleck figures if you do the adjustment upward he thinks necessary for those who had DGU incidents without personally owning a gun in the home at the time of the survey, and then the adjustment downward he thinks necessary because CDC didn't do detailed follow-ups to confirm the nature of the incident, you get 1.24 percent, a close match to his own 1.326 percent figure.
He concludes that the small difference between his estimate and the CDC's "can be attributed to declining rates of violent crime, which accounts for most DGUs. With fewer occasions for self-defense in the form of violent victimizations, one would expect fewer DGUs."
Kleck further details how much these CDC surveys confirmed his own controversial work:
Also...the rest...
A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....
The name of the group doing the study, the year of the study, the number of defensive gun uses and if police and military defensive gun uses are included.....notice the bill clinton and obama defensive gun use research is highlighted.....
GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense
GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys
Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, no military)
DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, no military)
L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, no military)
Kleck......1994...2.5 million ( no cops, no military)
CDC...1996-1998... 1.1 million averaged over those years.( no cops, no military)
Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million
--------------------
Bordua...1977...1,414,544
DMIb...1978...1,098,409 ( no cops, no military)
Hart...1981...1.797,461 ( no cops, no military)
Mauser...1990...1,487,342 ( no cops,no military)
Gallup...1993...1,621,377 ( no cops, no military)
DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million ( the bill clinton study)
Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."
(Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology,[17] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.[18])
Paper: "Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment." By David McDowall and others. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, March 2000. Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment - Springer
-------------------------------------------
Ohio...1982...771,043
Gallup...1991...777,152
Tarrance... 1994... 764,036 (no cops, no military)
Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..
You ******* idiot
The following 15 states were surveyed: Alaska, Colorado, Hawaii, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, Montana, Ohio
Shit head......ignoring the Centers for Disease Control research, and ignoring the Department of Justice research, and then ignoring the 16 or so other research papers just shows you know you can't disprove the number, so you have to pretend the actual research doesn't exist....we aren't talking one study, we are talking 17.......by both government and private researchers over a long period of time with the government researchers actively engaged in disproving the number...
You ******* moron....
DrLove
Diamond Member
Vagabond63 has debunked his figures many time on here Harry. he will be along at some point to do it again.to him he did back them up.....its up to you to disprove his "facts".....your the one who said that to him not me...apparently you dont have better source either do you?...so does he have to use your anti gun sites?...
Link us to your 1.1 mil claim please - Studies by your beloved (and corrupt) NRA or other barrel stoker sites unacceptable
Nope, just a source to prove he didn’t pull 1.1 million butt nuggets out of his prodigious ass.
You got one?
No one can disprove an ass nugget Harry my boy.
Up to him to back up those with FACTS.
1.1m?
No, he hasn't....he says ..."I debunk thy numbers...." and then goes away.......I have shown the research from the Centers for Disease Control, and the Department of Justice, two anti-gun government agencies....
And yet you’ve provided no precise definitions. And you won’t because the premise is bullshit.
2aguy
Diamond Member
- Jul 19, 2014
- 113,045
- 53,542
- 2,290
You know its over when you go nazi.Most developed countries have a better life quality than most Americans, more educated, healthier, higher life expectancy rates....less crimes and homicides. How did owning a gun make you better than them again ?We are not subject, like you.Boy, 6, shot and killed after mum gave another driver the finger on school-run
Aiden Leos was sitting in the back of his family car when he was shot and killed as a result of what is believed to be a road rage attack
Its almost impossible to process this incident. What is wrong with you people ?
Well...you mean after World War 1 and World War 2...when we went over to Europe with guns to save them.......or after the Europeans gave up their guns, then the German socialists murdered 12 million unarmed men, women and children?
And now, as the United States protects Europe with our blood and money...our military keeps Russia from taking over the continent, and keeps German from invading it's neighbors.....so that Europeans can live in their welfare states as we protect them, and provide their advanced medical technology and all of their real technological innovation....
Do you mean that......?
If the Europeans actually had to pay their own way.....have their young men and women serve in their militaries, pay for their militaries.....and actually work for a living....maybe they wouldn't have time to feel superior to the U.S....
Meanwhile, our citizens use our legal guns to save lives every single year....1.1 million times a year our citizens use their legal guns to stop rape, robberies and murders...
And, shithead.......Europe is not the Europe it used to be....3rd world immigrant drug gangs are using fully automatic miltary rifles and grenades to enforce their drug trade....
So violence is coming to Europe.....
You know it's over when you have nothing.....you post crap, can't deal with actual responses to your lame posts.......then you hide....
2aguy
Diamond Member
- Jul 19, 2014
- 113,045
- 53,542
- 2,290
Vagabond63 has debunked his figures many time on here Harry. he will be along at some point to do it again.to him he did back them up.....its up to you to disprove his "facts".....your the one who said that to him not me...apparently you dont have better source either do you?...so does he have to use your anti gun sites?...
Link us to your 1.1 mil claim please - Studies by your beloved (and corrupt) NRA or other barrel stoker sites unacceptable
Nope, just a source to prove he didn’t pull 1.1 million butt nuggets out of his prodigious ass.
You got one?
No one can disprove an ass nugget Harry my boy.
Up to him to back up those with FACTS.
1.1m?
No, he hasn't....he says ..."I debunk thy numbers...." and then goes away.......I have shown the research from the Centers for Disease Control, and the Department of Justice, two anti-gun government agencies....
And yet you’ve provided no precise definitions. And you won’t because the premise is bullshit.
I gave you the actual research......by trained, professional researchers, most of them anti-gun and trying to disprove defensive gun use....now you will go into moving goal posts to hide the fact that you can't dispute the actual research...don't throw out your back as you move those goal posts...
- Banned
- #160
Well, the anti freedom posters are all a bunch of dishonest losers anyway, so don't waste too much time on them.You know its over when you go nazi.Most developed countries have a better life quality than most Americans, more educated, healthier, higher life expectancy rates....less crimes and homicides. How did owning a gun make you better than them again ?We are not subject, like you.Boy, 6, shot and killed after mum gave another driver the finger on school-run
Aiden Leos was sitting in the back of his family car when he was shot and killed as a result of what is believed to be a road rage attack
Its almost impossible to process this incident. What is wrong with you people ?
Well...you mean after World War 1 and World War 2...when we went over to Europe with guns to save them.......or after the Europeans gave up their guns, then the German socialists murdered 12 million unarmed men, women and children?
And now, as the United States protects Europe with our blood and money...our military keeps Russia from taking over the continent, and keeps German from invading it's neighbors.....so that Europeans can live in their welfare states as we protect them, and provide their advanced medical technology and all of their real technological innovation....
Do you mean that......?
If the Europeans actually had to pay their own way.....have their young men and women serve in their militaries, pay for their militaries.....and actually work for a living....maybe they wouldn't have time to feel superior to the U.S....
Meanwhile, our citizens use our legal guns to save lives every single year....1.1 million times a year our citizens use their legal guns to stop rape, robberies and murders...
And, shithead.......Europe is not the Europe it used to be....3rd world immigrant drug gangs are using fully automatic miltary rifles and grenades to enforce their drug trade....
So violence is coming to Europe.....
You know it's over when you have nothing.....you post crap, can't deal with actual responses to your lame posts.......then you hide....
Similar threads
New Topics
-
Please comment on new “ Project Hell Marry trailer ?? Getting great reviews- Started by Quasar44
- Replies: 0
-
Jasmine Crockett’s Security Guard Fatally Shot By Dallas SWAT In Standoff – What We Know
- Started by excalibur
- Replies: 0
-
-
Illegal immigrant was discovered to have been voting for more than a decade in Philadelphia- Started by DonGlock26
- Replies: 8
